MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401642750 · doi:10.1080/17460913.2024.2359879

Microbiological analysis of tunneled hemodialysis catheters isolated from patients receiving hemodialysis in Saskatchewan

2024· article· en· W4401642750 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Murugesan Sivaranjani, Haley Sanderson, Chinenye R. Nnajide, Anna Martens-Koop, Joseph M Blondeau, Rodrick Stryker, Aaron P. White

Bibliographic record

VenueFuture Microbiology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicCentral Venous Catheters and Hemodialysis
Canadian institutionsRoyal University HospitalSaskatchewan Health AuthorityUniversity of SaskatchewanAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersRoyal University Hospital Foundation
KeywordsHemodialysisHemodialysis CatheterMedicineIntensive care medicineInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aim: To compare the microbial communities inside hemodialysis catheters from symptomatic and asymptomatic patients to determine their differences.Materials & methods: Catheters (n = 41) were removed from patients in the Saskatchewan Health Authority over an 18-month period. The catheter section inside the body was flushed and the contents were evaluated using culture-dependent and culture-independent analysis.Results: All catheters were colonized by bacteria, with considerable overlap between groups based on microbial communities and the individual species detected. More Gram-negative species were detected by sequencing, whereas predominantly Gram-positive strains were cultured. Antibiotic resistance and biofilm formation was widespread and not correlated with either catheter group.Conclusion: Common pathogens were detected in each set of catheters, therefore predicting infections based on the microbiology is difficult.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.939
Threshold uncertainty score0.122

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.273 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFuture MicrobiologySame topicCentral Venous Catheters and HemodialysisFrench-language works237,207